Gene summit organizers urge caution on human gene editing

WASHINGTON, Dec 3 (Reuters) - Scientists and ethicists at a
global meeting in Washington said it would be "irresponsible" to
use gene editing technology in human embryos for therapeutic
purposes, such as to correct genetic diseases, until safety and
efficacy issues are resolved.

But organizers of the International Summit on Human Gene
Editing said editing genes in human embryos was permissible for
research purposes, so long as the modified cells would not be
implanted to establish a pregnancy.

The statement on Thursday comes as debate grows over the use
of powerful new gene editing tools in human eggs, sperm and
embryos, which are called germline cells. Such tools have the
power to change the DNA of unborn children. (http://bit.ly/1QWLlS8)

The group's guidance follows calls for various bans on use
of the technology known as CRISPR-Cas9, which has quickly become
the preferred method of gene editing in research labs because of
its ease of use compared with older techniques.

CRISPR-Cas9 works as a type of molecular scissors that can
selectively trim away unwanted parts of the genome, and replace
it with new stretches of DNA.

Advocates say the technology can speed the day that
scientists are able to prevent hereditary diseases. Opponents
worry about unknown effects on future generations and the
temptation by future parents to pay for genetic enhancements
such as greater intelligence or athletic ability.

"It would be irresponsible to proceed with any clinical use
of germline editing unless and until the relevant safety and
efficacy issues have been resolved, based on appropriate
understanding and balancing of risks, potential benefits and
alternatives, and there is broad societal consensus about the
appropriateness of the proposed application," the statement
said.

The meeting was convened by the National Academies of
Medicine and Sciences, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and the
Royal Society of the United Kingdom.

The group also endorsed research on the use of gene editing
in non-reproductive or "somatic" cells toward the development of
treatments, such as sickle cell disease or as a treatment for
HIV, because such work falls under established regulatory
frameworks.

REPORT COMING NEXT YEAR

The organizers also recommend an ongoing international forum
to discuss potential clinical uses of gene editing.

The National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of
Medicine have begun a study to examine the potential
ramifications of human germline editing and will produce a
report next year.

Debra Matthews, an ethicist and expert on stem cell science
at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, said the notion of an
ongoing forum was "fantastic" but that the committee's decision
to draw the line on germline editing at reproduction was
curious, especially in light of past controversies about
embryonic stem cell research.

"I can understand why they did that, but I disagree," she
said.

In the United States, researchers are banned from using
federal funds for human embryonic stem cell research, but such
work may be done with private or state funding.

Concerns over the use of gene editing technology were raised
in April when a team of Chinese scientists reported carrying out
the first experiment to alter the DNA of human embryos.

But at a news conference following the meeting, David
Baltimore, one of the meeting organizers and former president of
the California Institute of Technology, said the research was in
accordance with Chinese regulations and conformed to the
committee's dictates.

(Reporting by Julie Steenhuysen in Washington and Siddharth
Cavale in Bengaluru; Editing by Andrew Hay and Peter Cooney)